FPS

[DougC]

I am a deliriously happy D500 shooter and frequently use the 10 FPS option. That said, a friend and highly respected professional wildlife photographer has recently switched to Sony and placed the 20 fps capability as one of the main reasons for the switch. It got me thinking that we may be fast approaching a point where we will basically be shooting video and simply picking out a single frame to represent as a still photo. I‘d like to hear your thoughts on this.

 

[DRwyoming]

I am a deliriously happy D500 shooter and frequently use the 10 FPS option. That said, a friend and highly respected professional wildlife photographer has recently switched to Sony and placed the 20 fps capability as one of the main reasons for the switch. It got me thinking that we may be fast approaching a point where we will basically be shooting video and simply picking out a single frame to represent as a still photo. I‘d like to hear your thoughts on this.

Yeah, given the common 24 FPS video modes we're already approaching that point assuming you have enough memory in the field and back home to store all those images and the time to sort through and pick out the best of the best.

No doubt higher frame rates can be invaluable in certain action sequences like capturing just the right wing position for BIF images or that amazing moment as animals interact at high speed. But for an awful lot of images there's no real demand for those kind of high frame rates and it does take some discipline to stay in high frame rate mode and only capture short bursts or single images when the camera is ready to fire away at blazing speeds.

I'd say if action is your game then something like that 20 FPS Sony is probably an amazing tool. And sure no one forces you to hold down the shutter release and capture long bursts for more static portraits but I'm pretty happy with my D5, D500 and D850 (with grip and large battery) frame rates for what I do. But if you do shoot long bursts of high res images at 20 FPS then better plan on a lot of memory both in the field and at home or a good culling process with some good critical discipline to manage the high volume of captures. I guess that's a pretty good problem to have (too many great and similar keepers) but it's not without a cost in terms of back end review, sorting and culling time.

 

[Callie]

Love my D500 too but shoot max 9 f/s. At 10f/s, it is not so agile - my D500. More frames/sec is great, but as mentioned by DR above, you will end up with an unmanageable number of images in the end. I have >500k images, some just shot and put on a hard drive for when I am on pension one day. That one day has dawned a few years ago, and I still have not gotten to many images. Shooting in short burst is a definite positive. Some wing beats for instance coincide with the shutter speed and you get the same nearly identical 3 wing positions for 30 or more frames if shooting continuously. So, maybe more frames work, maybe less. Steve posted on his site a thing, can't remember video or talk, about frames/sec.

 

[Steve]

Agree with the above.

It really does depend on the scene though. I know when I shoot 20FPS for BIF work, each and every frame is different. As long as I'm getting different poses in each frame, I'm happy. Where you really have to be careful is with static subjects - you don't want hundreds of photos of the same pose to sort!

However, I still recommend leaving the camera at its highest frame rate and learning to shoot in short bursts. The trouble is, when you go to a lower FPS for portrait work, if that portrait turns into action (and with wildlife that's no unusual) you don't want to wish you had been shooting a faster FPS. With a bit of practice, it's easy to pop off just short bursts, even at high frame rates. Once you get good at it, you have the best of both worlds

 

[Woodyg3]

Well, you can save a single frame out of a video now as a picture file. So we are kind of there already. Just not quite a the image quality of a regular picture file.

As someone who often takes tons of bird in flight shots, I have at times taken 3000 shots in a day, and I never considered it as a problem. I certainly toss a lot of shots, but 10fps on my D500 is a blessing, not a curse. 20 fps on a mirrorless without viewfinder blackout would certainly be nice, and when I didn't need that, I'd have no problems shooting in short bursts. Do I "need" that many FPS? Well, 40+ years ago in college when I shot sports to make a few extra bucks my "frame rate" was however fast I could advance the film with the thumb lever to take the next shot. I got some great shots in those years, and I guess none of us "need" the technological advances we have gotten in newer cameras, but certainly we benefit.